Things that never make the news...

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #81

On or around Wed, 12 Oct 2005 21:27:42 +0100, Lee_D
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>
>I.e. it's the item in this case that is offensive and not the action
>for the possesion offence. Owness is on the defendant to prove that
>"on the balance of probabilites" the possesion was reasonable. Whilst
>this may sound harsh it's not quite as harsh as having to "prove
>beyond all reasonable doubt" that the possesion was reasonable.

yet a another erosion of the presumption of innocence.

Just been looking into habeas corpus, which the new anti-terror thing will
severely alter.

Not sure that the presumption of innocence until proven guilty is actually
built into the law, but it ought to be. Increasingly, however, it's the
case that you have to prove your innocence or be assumed to be guilty.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn, The swallow twittering
from the strawbuilt shed, The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing
horn, No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed."
Thomas Gray, Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard.

 

J

Jeremy Mortimer

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #82

Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> where I am, almost 40

About 10 years younger than me! I would never have guessed. You're too
young to be such a grouch

> I gather we now, in Europe, have reciprocal pension thingies and so
> forth which means that if you go an live in another EU country, you
> can still get yer pension paid anyway (this may be a misconception on
> my part). If so, well, I gather that Portugal still has reasonably
> priced property, provided you stay away from the tourist trap areas,
> and there's a reasonable attitude to offroaders and Landies...
> [seriously, I know several people who've relocated to other countries
> in Europe - including one couple to Portugal]
>
> Minor drawback that I don't know *any* Portuguese, but I spose I could
> learn.

Portugal is wonderful, but if you're interested in cheap property consider
(particularly if you're planning to move in 25 years time) whether you
shouldn't instead learn Czech, or Latvian, or Romanian, or Serbo-Croatian,
or Turkish, or perhaps even Arabic. Although in most parts of Europe you
can already get by in English, thanks to the education and ambition of the
locals, and it will only get easier in the future.

Jeremy

 

M

Mother

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #83

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:57:33 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Not sure that the presumption of innocence until proven guilty is actually
>built into the law, but it ought to be. Increasingly, however, it's the
>case that you have to prove your innocence or be assumed to be guilty.

The 'problem' is that the focus is becoming skewed. Taking the
decision making away from the Courts and Judges and vesting the power
and responsibility in Ministers. Go figure, that's not 'law'.


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005

 

M

Mother

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #84

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:39:59 GMT, Jeremy Mortimer
<[email protected]_this.org> wrote:

>instead learn Czech, or Latvian, or Romanian

Got friends who upped and moved to Romania a couple of years ago.

I've given it some thought, but the place is still pretty grim.


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005

 

S

SpamTrapSeeSig

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #85

[beware - wildly off topic!]
In article <[email protected]>, Mother <"@
{mother} @"@101fc.net> writes
>On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 09:57:33 +0100, Austin Shackles
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Not sure that the presumption of innocence until proven guilty is actually
>>built into the law, but it ought to be. Increasingly, however, it's the
>>case that you have to prove your innocence or be assumed to be guilty.
>
>The 'problem' is that the focus is becoming skewed. Taking the
>decision making away from the Courts and Judges and vesting the power
>and responsibility in Ministers. Go figure, that's not 'law'.

Somebody expressed it to me recently in very stark terms:

We've abolished capital punishment, which was state execution after
careful investigation, due process of law, and an appeals process.

The Commissioner of the Met. and the Home Secretary now want us to
accept killing by the police on mere suspicion of criminality.

Something is very, very wrong.


Regards,

Simonm.

--
simonm|at|muircom|dot|demon|.|c|oh|dot|u|kay
SIMON MUIR, BRISTOL UK www.ukip.org
EUROPEANS AGAINST THE EU www.members.aol.com/eurofaq
GT250A'76 R80/RT'86 110CSW TD'88 www.kc3ltd.co.uk/profile/eurofollie/

 

G

GbH

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #86

In news:[email protected],
Jeremy Mortimer <[email protected]_this.org> blithered:
> Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>> where I am, almost 40
>
> About 10 years younger than me! I would never have guessed. You're too
> young to be such a grouch

Think what he'll be like with another ten years practice?

>
>> I gather we now, in Europe, have reciprocal pension thingies and so
>> forth which means that if you go an live in another EU country, you
>> can still get yer pension paid anyway (this may be a misconception on
>> my part). If so, well, I gather that Portugal still has reasonably
>> priced property, provided you stay away from the tourist trap areas,
>> and there's a reasonable attitude to offroaders and Landies...
>> [seriously, I know several people who've relocated to other countries
>> in Europe - including one couple to Portugal]
>>
>> Minor drawback that I don't know *any* Portuguese, but I spose I
>> could learn.
>
> Portugal is wonderful, but if you're interested in cheap property
> consider (particularly if you're planning to move in 25 years time)
> whether you shouldn't instead learn Czech, or Latvian, or Romanian,
> or Serbo-Croatian, or Turkish, or perhaps even Arabic. Although in
> most parts of Europe you can already get by in English, thanks to the
> education and ambition of the locals, and it will only get easier in
> the future.
>
> Jeremy



--
"He who says it cannot be done should not interrupt her doing it."

If at first you don't succeed,
maybe skydiving's not for you!

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #87

On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:31:29 +0100, "GbH"
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In news:[email protected],
>Jeremy Mortimer <[email protected]_this.org> blithered:
>> Austin Shackles <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> where I am, almost 40
>>
>> About 10 years younger than me! I would never have guessed. You're too
>> young to be such a grouch
>
>Think what he'll be like with another ten years practice?
>

and that's another thing... there's no respect these days...




--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus fio" (it is when I struggle to be
brief that I become obscure) Horace (65 - 8 BC) Ars Poetica, 25

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #88

On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:50:14 +1300, EMB <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>Here's a business you could buy there Austin.
>
>http://www.rarosafaritours.co.ck/ <-- unfortunate TLD too.

Splorfft!

I think I'd go for ".org.ck", meself, assuming it's possible.

--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus fio" (it is when I struggle to be
brief that I become obscure) Horace (65 - 8 BC) Ars Poetica, 25

 

L

Lee_D

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #89

During stardate Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:20:30 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
<[email protected]> uttered the imortal words:

>The Commissioner of the Met. and the Home Secretary now want us to
>accept killing by the police on mere suspicion of criminality.
>
>Something is very, very wrong.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Simonm.

Oh goodie my turn for a rant.

So when you have reason to suspect [1] that the chap infront has his
finger on a trigger of a explosive device which may work on release
and is intent on doing what he set out regardless of what any one else
says / does how do you deal with that, say in a Railway station or
other area full of the public where mass loss of life is most certain?
Taking out the command centre, i.e. the brain.. with the faint hope
that the finger will stay put on that trigger and maybe SOME people
can go home that day.

Or do you just lett'em carry on and get out the mop, say sorry to the
family and accept that the battle against all things evil is lost, go
home and kick the dog and put a call in to the appropriate terror
groups legal rep the next day.

Now if someone would kindly jump on the Human rights bandwagon then
I'd like to hear some debate around the Human rights of people who
want to blow up your family and friends.

Oh I could go on and on on this subject. Like do you think that those
officers relish the thought that the person they are about to send to
meet their maker could be innocent? The stats are well stacked against
it but when the Captial is being pinged by multiple bomb attacks each
fortnight you still have little choice.

I say bring back hanging as well. Look at the states.. you can be on
death row for longer than some of the wassocks in this country
actually serve in prision for some heavy stuff.

<and breath....>

Lee D

[1] - Regardless of any other factors your belief is honestly held and
your subsequent actions are reasonable in the circumstances.

--
Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiam.
Winston Churchill

www.lrproject.com
'76 101 Camper
'64 88" IIa V8 Auto
'97 Disco ES Auto LPG'd
'01 Laguna

 

M

Mother

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #90

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:51:35 +0100, Lee_D
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Oh goodie my turn for a rant.

I think this is a subject that many will have some quite strong views
on, and could also be one of 'those' threads that can develop into
things being said in the heat of the moment an all...

P'raps best to leave it here and get on with mopping up the oil from
the drive and getting ready for a damp weekend in Wales


--
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one
of distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being
increasingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, formerly of BT Labs
In memory of Brian {Hamilton Kelly} who logged off 15th September 2005

 

B

beamendsltd

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #91

In message <[email protected]>
Lee_D <[email protected]> wrote:

> During stardate Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:20:30 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
> <[email protected]> uttered the imortal words:
>
> >The Commissioner of the Met. and the Home Secretary now want us to
> >accept killing by the police on mere suspicion of criminality.
> >
> >Something is very, very wrong.
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Simonm.
>
> Oh goodie my turn for a rant.
>
> So when you have reason to suspect [1] that the chap infront has his
> finger on a trigger of a explosive device which may work on release
> and is intent on doing what he set out regardless of what any one else
> says / does how do you deal with that, say in a Railway station or
> other area full of the public where mass loss of life is most certain?
> Taking out the command centre, i.e. the brain.. with the faint hope
> that the finger will stay put on that trigger and maybe SOME people
> can go home that day.
>
> Or do you just lett'em carry on and get out the mop, say sorry to the
> family and accept that the battle against all things evil is lost, go
> home and kick the dog and put a call in to the appropriate terror
> groups legal rep the next day.
>
> Now if someone would kindly jump on the Human rights bandwagon then
> I'd like to hear some debate around the Human rights of people who
> want to blow up your family and friends.
>
> Oh I could go on and on on this subject. Like do you think that those
> officers relish the thought that the person they are about to send to
> meet their maker could be innocent? The stats are well stacked against
> it but when the Captial is being pinged by multiple bomb attacks each
> fortnight you still have little choice.
>
> I say bring back hanging as well. Look at the states.. you can be on
> death row for longer than some of the wassocks in this country
> actually serve in prision for some heavy stuff.
>
> <and breath....>
>
> Lee D
>
> [1] - Regardless of any other factors your belief is honestly held and
> your subsequent actions are reasonable in the circumstances.
>
> --
> Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiam.
> Winston Churchill
>
> www.lrproject.com
> '76 101 Camper
> '64 88" IIa V8 Auto
> '97 Disco ES Auto LPG'd
> '01 Laguna

I thought it worked like this these days.....

Public get killed.
Step 1. Phone lawyer
Step 2. Phone ambulance
Step 3. Sue everyone including the burger van man.
Step 4. Get lawyer to make a statement saying "We are not just doing
if for the money......."
Step 5. Find MP with absolutely no career prospects, and fading
"personality" to back case.

Killer gets Killed.
Step 1. Phone lawyer
Step 2. Phone ambulance
Step 3. Sue everyone including the burger van man and the killers
teachers (parents obviously excluded coz' it can't be anything
to do with them).
Step 4. Get lawyer to make a stateement saying "We are not just doing
if for the money......."
Step 5. Find MP with absolutely no career prospects, and fading
"personality" to back case.

I'd love to be wrong....

Richard


--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Boycott the Yorkshire Dales - No Play, No Pay

 

S

Steve Taylor

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #92

Lee_D wrote:


> Oh I could go on and on on this subject. Like do you think that those
> officers relish the thought that the person they are about to send to
> meet their maker could be innocent?

I don't think they do, I don't think they think, they are filled with
the blood lust that humans get in on a hunt, of anything. Its basic,
low-level, hard wired into our low brain functions, deep in our animal
brains (amygdala ? ). Once the "chase" was on the outcome was pretty
inevitable.

The officers were doing what they were trained to do, sure, but what
they were doing was based on horrendous intelligence, and we now find
out that they had safer options for taking him down BEFORE he got on a
crowded tube, even assuming he was a suicide bomber.

And if I were designing suicide bomb fuses, you sure as hell wouldn't
stop mine going off just by shooting the guy with the button.
Fortunately these groups don't have real engineers working for them.

Steve

 

T

Tim Hobbs

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #93

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:51:35 +0100, Lee_D
<[email protected]> wrote:

>During stardate Thu, 13 Oct 2005 10:20:30 GMT, SpamTrapSeeSig
><[email protected]> uttered the imortal words:
>
>>The Commissioner of the Met. and the Home Secretary now want us to
>>accept killing by the police on mere suspicion of criminality.
>>
>>Something is very, very wrong.
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Simonm.
>
>Oh goodie my turn for a rant.
>
>So when you have reason to suspect [1] that the chap infront has his
>finger on a trigger of a explosive device which may work on release
>and is intent on doing what he set out regardless of what any one else
>says / does how do you deal with that, say in a Railway station or
>other area full of the public where mass loss of life is most certain?
>Taking out the command centre, i.e. the brain.. with the faint hope
>that the finger will stay put on that trigger and maybe SOME people
>can go home that day.

You follow them through crowded streets, on a bus and then down into a
crowded tube station. Then shoot them...

<snip>

>Oh I could go on and on on this subject. Like do you think that those
>officers relish the thought that the person they are about to send to
>meet their maker could be innocent? The stats are well stacked against
>it but when the Captial is being pinged by multiple bomb attacks each
>fortnight you still have little choice.

I feel sorry for the guys doing the job, to the best of their ability
and with the training and policies they have.

But however you slice it, the whole episode stinks. I don't think
anyone wanted to kill an innocent man, but the events immediately
before and after reek of cover up and corruption.


The sad truth is that every restriction of freedom and every chip out
of our traditional way of life is another small victory for terrorism.
I guess that makes Blair the biggest terrorist of all.




--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'03 Volvo V70

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #94

On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:51:35 +0100, Lee_D
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>So when you have reason to suspect [1] that the chap infront has his
>finger on a trigger of a explosive device which may work on release
>and is intent on doing what he set out regardless of what any one else
>says / does how do you deal with that, say in a Railway station or
>other area full of the public where mass loss of life is most certain?
>Taking out the command centre, i.e. the brain.. with the faint hope
>that the finger will stay put on that trigger and maybe SOME people
>can go home that day.

Quite honestly, I doubt you can in fact stop him blowing it up. That's why
it's called a "dead-man trigger" - though it's faintly possible that blowing
his brains out will work. Either that of go for the trigger itself in the
hopes of damaging the mechanism so it don't work... but were it me designing
it, it'd be a simple "break circuit and up she goes" system, and I don't
really see how you can prevent that from being triggered. 'bout the only
thing you can do, in such case, would be to swamp the suspect with manpower
and hope to take over holding the trigger until such time as it can be
safely defused... might be that you want to blow his brains out at the same
time if opportunity allows.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"If you cannot mould yourself as you would wish, how can you expect
other people to be entirely to your liking?"
Thomas À Kempis (1380 - 1471) Imitation of Christ, I.xvi.

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #95

On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 16:34:41 +0100, Steve Taylor
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>And if I were designing suicide bomb fuses, you sure as hell wouldn't
>stop mine going off just by shooting the guy with the button.
>Fortunately these groups don't have real engineers working for them.

not sure about that. There's no evidence really - mostly, you don't know
someone's a suicide bomber 'til they blow up, but anyone close enough to try
to prevent it would no doubt get blown up as well, anyway.

but a dead-man trigger is pretty simple, really, and doubtless the simpler
the better.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"If you cannot mould yourself as you would wish, how can you expect
other people to be entirely to your liking?"
Thomas À Kempis (1380 - 1471) Imitation of Christ, I.xvi.

 

A

Austin Shackles

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #96

On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:34:00 +0100, Tim Hobbs <[email protected]>
enlightened us thusly:

>But however you slice it, the whole episode stinks. I don't think
>anyone wanted to kill an innocent man, but the events immediately
>before and after reek of cover up and corruption.

with you there. The people on the ground were doubtless following the bloke
thinking "is he or isn't he" and not sure whether to shoot the poor bugger
or not.

but frankly, if we come to the point where people can be shot on suspicion
and where people can be arrested and held without trial, then we've already
lost most of the much-vaunted freedom we're supposed to have. By my book,
the correct response would be what they used to write on bombed buildings in
the war "Business as usual" - if you enact draconian measures to try to
prevent that which is, basically, untraceable and unpreventable, you're
doing the terrrists job for them, as you say. They don't even need to
actually blow anything up any more.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
Satisfying: Satisfy your inner child by eating ten tubes of Smarties
from the Little Book of Complete B***ocks by Alistair Beaton.

 

L

Lee_D

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #97

During stardate Thu, 13 Oct 2005 18:05:03 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> uttered the imortal words:

>On or around Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:34:00 +0100, Tim Hobbs <[email protected]>
>enlightened us thusly:
>
>>But however you slice it, the whole episode stinks. I don't think
>>anyone wanted to kill an innocent man, but the events immediately
>>before and after reek of cover up and corruption.

I'll wait on the full report rather than the trial by media.

>with you there. The people on the ground were doubtless following the bloke
>thinking "is he or isn't he" and not sure whether to shoot the poor bugger
>or not.

Whole heartedly agree and I'd go as far as to say those authorising
the use of firearms were also having the same nightmares.

>but frankly, if we come to the point where people can be shot on suspicion
>and where people can be arrested and held without trial, then we've already
>lost most of the much-vaunted freedom we're supposed to have. By my book,
>the correct response would be what they used to write on bombed buildings in
>the war "Business as usual" - if you enact draconian measures to try to
>prevent that which is, basically, untraceable and unpreventable, you're
>doing the terrrists job for them, as you say. They don't even need to
>actually blow anything up any more.

I agree in part, the terror factor is pretty complete. But you still
need tools to deal with these elements. What is the alternative?

We've actually come along way in recent years. In the days of Judges
rules you could sling someone in a cell, go home for rest days and
interview them when you came back when they had time to think it over.
PACE sorted that out and rightly so. Now we (the country) have adopted
the Human rights act too so people can have their day out in
Brussells. It's not all so much a one way street as the picture your
painting suggests.

Perhaphs we should just give them a fixed penalty ticket or put
terrorist Gatsos up and send them an Notice of intended prosecution,
that would show them whats what.

What I fail to see is what the feck all this has to do with
Landrovers.

Lee D
--
Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiam.
Winston Churchill

www.lrproject.com
'76 101 Camper
'64 88" IIa V8 Auto
'97 Disco ES Auto LPG'd
'01 Laguna

 

M

Mother

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #98

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 21:54:07 +0100, Lee_D
<[email protected]> wrote:

>What I fail to see is what the feck all this has to do with
>Landrovers.

Yup...

 

S

Steve

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #99

Lee_D wrote:

> I agree in part, the terror factor is pretty complete. But you still
> need tools to deal with these elements. What is the alternative?

Use the army. Don't arm civilians. And I class the police as civilians.
Put recording cameras on all police firearms so that after every
discharge , data is available for the subsequent enquiry and blokes
carrying table legs in carrier bags might get some posthumous justice.

And only permit the use of rifles and not handguns, preferably with
electronic lockout on the triggers so that only chief constable
authority unlocks them, and if something goes wrong, we shoot the chief
constable....That should help.

And I think this has naff all to do with Landies too.

Steve

 

L

Lee_D

Guest

• Oct 13, 2005

• #100

During stardate Thu, 13 Oct 2005 22:40:56 +0100, Steve
<[email protected]> uttered the imortal words:


>And I think this has naff all to do with Landies too.
>
>Steve

I'll bring some wood for the brazier...this could take a while ;-)

Lee D
--
Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiam.
Winston Churchill

www.lrproject.com
'76 101 Camper
'64 88" IIa V8 Auto
'97 Disco ES Auto LPG'd
'01 Laguna